On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 07:22:24 +0200, Guillermo Espertino
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In Gimp, it saves the file directly, without asking for the compression
> setting. Result: an image over-compressed with artifacts. Smaller size
> than the original.
> In Photoshop, it shows the quality settings the first time you hit
I think we're finally getting closer to the truth. There is something non
standard in the file the camera is producing. It seems that PS knows
there's a problem and thus prompts for the quality parameter, gimp it
would seem is either reading this value as the IJG quality when it isn't
or is applying a not too good default when it fails to read it.
If it's an incorrect value put in by the camera that gimp is correctly
reading it's not a gimp issue. If it is a missing value gimp should
probably use it's jpeg default of 85 (or prompt as you suggest) which it
does not seem to be doing.
If you have imagemagick installed, use the following to see what
information is in one of your camera images before you affect it with
either gimp or ps and then again after gimp (and/or PS) does a save on it:
identify -verbose unadulterated_image.jpeg
That should give some info on what is in the jpeg header.
Gimp-developer mailing list